I do agree overall as I see better choices in more educated families (e.g. more likely to breastfeed, opt for better food, reading vs. TV) and the people I know who don't vax or delay/select tend to have graduate degrees.

Anti example from my family: MD PhD sister. Yes, she breastfeeds for 4 years and has natural births, but she starts solids no later than 4 months, allows a lot of juice, chocolate, processed stuff, thinks organic is a hoax, vaxes for nearly everything (staunch opponent of HPV, flu for everyone, chickenpox), her kids are on antibiotics at least 6 times per year. The thing I don't get is the food issue: as a doctor wouldn't you opt for healthier choices? She thinks fresh foods are just as good as a nutella bread for her kid. I get it's about convenience, but daily large chocolate infusions downed with apple juice aren't a good idea imho (she also thinks all vitamins and supplements are stupid - did I mention she works in pharma, lol).

Do the new guidelines address the devastating health effects of hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils, which are found in nearly all processed foods? The oils with which these vegetables will most likely be cooked? Or the problems with GMO soy which is also found in most processed foods? Nope.

"Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport

Our school system in indoctrinated to teach what the government wants...

Was just going to say something along these lines. The medical establishment is that way, with next to no nutritional education in all the years of schooling... they have to learn much more about which drugs to prescribe.

I was told by the nurse and "lactation consultant", when I asked about dietary recommendations for breastfeeding that, "It's all game now! Cookies! Cake! You can have whatever you want!" Imagine all the new moms she give that advice to who don't know any better?

While I'm not advocating soda, in general, sugar soda would be better than artificial sweeteners. I also feel that juice, with nothing else added, is healthy, because of vitamins and minerals contained.

However, most doctors, in my opinion, have a fatalistic approach to diet. They work with diabetics who "can't give up sugar", and others who lie and claim to follow the dietary restrictions, while evidence suggests otherwise.

Also, doctors count occasional breastfeeding as breastfeeding, when the child is actually bottlefed mostly. At least this is true of doctors I know.

Organics is looked down on by many, in my experience. Some "know" organic food tastes like cardboard, when they have never even tried it! Or believe, wholeheartedly, that farmers lie and label produce as organi, when they "had to" use *some* chemicals. The amount of misinformation and erroneous beliefs about organics is too much!

Do the new guidelines address the devastating health effects of hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils, which are found in nearly all processed foods? The oils with which these vegetables will most likely be cooked? Or the problems with GMO soy which is also found in most processed foods? Nope.

Is there a single point in this article that can't be reduced to a comment that rich people and poor people do things differently?

We're pretty well off, but it hasn't escaped my attention that getting sugar free food requires a lot more attention at the grocery store, and often more money. This is even more true for organic and non-GMO foods. If I had the kind of job I could get without finishing high school, I would never set foot in Whole Foods. As is, I still pretty much avoid the place.

From an economic standpoint, childhood illnesses can be devastating to a family living on the edge. If missing a week of work would mean I got fired, or that our lights got turned off or I couldn't pay rent, I would absolutely get all the suggested vaccines, and when they offered up the optional flu and rotavirus shots, I'd go for those.

Is there a single point in this article that can't be reduced to a comment that rich people and poor people do things differently?

We're pretty well off, but it hasn't escaped my attention that getting sugar free food requires a lot more attention at the grocery store, and often more money. This is even more true for organic and non-GMO foods. If I had the kind of job I could get without finishing high school, I would never set foot in Whole Foods. As is, I still pretty much avoid the place.

From an economic standpoint, childhood illnesses can be devastating to a family living on the edge. If missing a week of work would mean I got fired, or that our lights got turned off or I couldn't pay rent, I would absolutely get all the suggested vaccines, and when they offered up the optional flu and rotavirus shots, I'd go for those.

From an economic standpoint, severe and even moderate adverse reactions to vaccine can be devastating to any family.

What do you think happens to a parent "living on the edge" who has to miss work to pick up a child who is having a seizure reaction, or a rash, or a fever, or joint pain, or intestinal problems? What about the parent who has to miss a week of work to deal with vaccine-induced autoimmune disorders?

Pek64, hand to mouth budgeting focuses on the short term out of necessity. This week and this month are the key factors. Long-term trades between groceries and medical are a luxury for the comparatively well off.

I am pretty damn familiar with the effects of having to pick up a kid from school for a bad vaccine reaction when your is on the edge. I know what a long-term special need is like in terms of cost even if I don't have current exact numbers. I also know what services are available to me if my kid gets chicken pox oreasles (none).

Taximom, I'm well aware that this is the I'm mot vaccinating forum, and I have thought before, and still think, that y'all might make a more compelling case if you checked your privilege now and then. Maybe you could, for example, not trash the way poor people grocery shop, or act like the only reason they make choices that differ from yours is ignorance.

MeepyCat why are you posting here to argue? This is a support forum for those not vaxing or considering not vaxing. Do you fall in either category? It sounds like you have an axe to grind with non-vaxers on this board.

t

"There are only two mistakes you can make in the search for the Truth. Not starting, and not going all the way." ~ Mark Passio

Pek64, hand to mouth budgeting focuses on the shprt term out of necessity. This week and this month are the key gactors. Long-term trades between groceries and medical are a luxury for the comparatively well off.

True. This may come into play when people choose to vax for CP, flu or rota (can I deal financially with a sick child?) It does not come into play when talking about other diseases, though, as many are very rare. I don't think a lot of people realise how rare some diseases are.

I am pretty damn familiar with the effects of having to pick up a kid from school for a bad vaccine reaction when your is on the edge. I know what a long-term special need is like in terms of cost even if I don't have current exact numbers. I also know what services are available to me if my kid gets chicken pox oreasles (none).

Without question, dealing with the health issues of someone who has special needs possibly brought on by a severe vaccine reaction is far, far harder and more expensive than dealing with chicken pox. At any income level. Personally, I really wish society was set up so parents could take off for sick kids without worrying about job security. I wish we had legislation that was more family friendly as opposed to work-friendly.

Taximom, I'm well aware that this is the I'm mot vaccinating forum, and I have thought before, and still think, that y'all might make a more compelling case if you checked your privilege now and then. Maybe you could, for example, not trash the way poor people grocery shop, or act like the only reason they make choices that differ from yours is ignorance.

There are people across MDC who come across a privileged when they talk about how others eat. This is hardly unique to INV and I have seen it worse, elsewhere. That being said, privileged does not relate to how compelling a case is or isn't. It just doesn't. If people want to dismiss a message because it comes from someone they see as privileged - that is on them.

I also think coming into INV and critisizing those on INV is not supportive. I would not do it on MV (and if I do, flag it or point it out)

There is a battle of two wolves inside us. One is good and the other is evil. The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?). We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

Kathy, I do find from time to time that privilege relates to hpw compelling a case is, and that's one reason why I point it out. I think the article linked here makes a predictable and pointless case that poor people are doing it wrong, and that that case has largely been given an uncritical pass in this discussion, with little acknowledgement of underlying causes.

I think when you start linking vax choices to really expensive food choices (where do I even find labelled non-GMO foods?) You lose a lot of audience in a hurry.

When someone posts an article, I think it's legit to respond to the article.

Meepycat - it is legit to have this discussion in Vaccination Discussion and Debate but not here. Please take it there if you wish to continue.

Quote:

I'm Not Vaccinating - This is a support-only forum for those not or those seriously considering not vaccinating. Here we host discussion of issues that arise when choosing to not vaccinate and sharing of resources and information that are related to the no-vax decision. Members who are vaccinating should not post here to debate or argue accuracy or opinion of things posted.

Since I posted the article, I should point out that I am neither well off, nor am I well educated. I am not "privileged" in any way. Some months, we struggle to get by. The thing we spend most of our money on is healthy food and vitamins. We spend at least $150 a month on supplements, and also see an ND when necessary, which is costly. We also buy more expensive, vegetarian, organic foods. My kids have never eaten at McDonalds or other fast food restaurants, and they are vegetarian. I wouldn't have it any other way, because this is what is important to me. If we don't have our health, we have nothing.

I find the article interesting, and I do think education and financial status do play into the decisions we make and how we raise our kids to some degree.

I, also, am not living by luxury standards. I do look at the overall budget, because doing otherwise does not help me or my family. I made my suggestion based on my real life experiences. If someone wants to debate this point, I will be happy to do so in the appropriate forum.

Purely in response to the article, I would be interested to know what fields in higher ed are associated with lower vax rates. A PhD in literature does not have as much knowledge of immunology, physiology, epidemiology as someone with just a BA or BS in biology.

At home amongst the redwoods with my husband and my son, born 7/5/11 Instant CNM, just add !

Purely in response to the article, I would be interested to know what fields in higher ed are associated with lower vax rates. A PhD in literature does not have as much knowledge of immunology, physiology, epidemiology as someone with just a BA or BS in biology.

Purely in response to the article, I would be interested to know what fields in higher ed are associated with lower vax rates. A PhD in literature does not have as much knowledge of immunology, physiology, epidemiology as someone with just a BA or BS in biology.

It has been my experience that more educated people are more likely to ask questions from professionals, and that less well educated people are more likely to do what they are told. More educated people (I would include self-educated as well) are more likely to know their rights. This is across the board and not just in relation to health matters.

This is in general, of course.

I do not think I know as much about immunology and physiology as someone with professional experience in those areas, however I also know a lot more about my body, my philosophy towards health and my tolerance to risk than any professional.

I will echo Pek, though, and ask what your point is?

There is a battle of two wolves inside us. One is good and the other is evil. The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?). We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

I think when people bring up the fact that non-vaxxers tend to be more educated (as the title says) it is often because we are accused so often of being stupid people who do not understand science.

I am very solidly middle class (by anyones standards) and have a Bachelors degree, fwiw.

When I initially made some of my vax decisions I was low income.

Yes, I remember reading a different article quite some time ago that said low income and/or uneducated people were thought to be the ones who were not vaccinating and when they looked into it, they actually found that a large majority of non-vaxers were in fact higher income, educated people.

My point is just what I said. Just because a person has a degree does not mean they must be making the best decisions in this case. People with only a high school education are usually not under the misperception that they have a good grasp of immunology, and are more open to following public health guidelines. Someone with a liberal arts BA may have equivalent knowledge of science as the high school graduate, but they are "educated" so they make their own guidelines and go with what feels right. Dunning-Kreuger effect. You don't know what you don't know.

At home amongst the redwoods with my husband and my son, born 7/5/11 Instant CNM, just add !

Well, I do think people who have devoted their lives to a field should be paid attention to. And that there is value in devoting yourself to a field and being evaluated rigorously by others in the field. AND there comes a point when experts will be right, and novices will be wrong; and that on rarer occasions, having fresh eyes on a topic brings new and invaluable insights. (Example, Jane Goodall! Total self-taught primatologist, got dropped off in Gombe and revolutionized the field.) but I don't like this review making it sound like in general, highly educated people tend not to vaccinate. If 99.9% of infectious disease physicians vaccinate their kids vs 5% of masters of fine arts grads, well, that doesn't tell me that not vaccinating is the better informed, "smarter" choice.

At home amongst the redwoods with my husband and my son, born 7/5/11 Instant CNM, just add !

Seems to me that more and less educated parents might be similarly likely to question vaccines, but that more educated parents may be less likely to accept the flimsy and dumbed down responses (fraught with logical fallacies- appeal to emotion, appeal to authority, etc) doctors and health authorities give as reassurance of safety. I agree that the expertise of someone who has specialized in a particular field is due a measure of respect, but I don't think anyone should defer to all of a doctor's advice just because of his/her degree.

Also, I don't necessarily agree that what field a person has studied makes one more or less capable of making informed healthcare decisions for one's family. I think we are all capable of gathering information from a number of sources and deciding- regardless of whether we have a background in the sciences.

I think it is important to realize that the way parents are spoken to by doctors also varies by the parents' SES. A physician addressing a highly educated, confident, and articulate person is less likely to use some of the more heavy handed, pushy, persuasion techniques that bully people into compliance. It is easier to bully people if THEY believe they're inferior, and many people do feel this way with doctors.

I've been both the young uneducated mother, and the older, well educated one, and there is a world of difference.

Well, I do think people who have devoted their lives to a field should be paid attention to.

Where do you draw the line?

Doctors who have devoted their lives to medicine have, with the very best of intentions, recommended all kinds of treatments that turned out to be unnecessary, ineffective, and unsafe.

Many of us have discovered that some vaccines fall into this category. There are plenty of peer-reviewed, mainstream scientific studies that show this.

The fact that the doctors who recommend the full schedule "have devoted their lives to their field" does not make those vaccines any less unnecessary, ineffective, or unsafe. The fact that doctors who "have devoted their lives to their field" have ended up as paid spokesmen for an the pharmaceutical industry--an industry whose bottom line is profits-- calls the whole system into question.

The fact that the health care industry, the health insurance industry, and the pharmaceutical industry are all rife with corruption, with the prime focus being profits rather than safety, trumps the best intentions of the doctors. Doctors are educated in a system where paid consultants with the pharmaceutical industry are in charge of what's taught. Medical schools, nursing schools, the professors who teach there, the research that's done there--all funded by and often directed by the pharmaceutical industry. The same is true for the continuing medical education credits needed for board certification.

The checks and balances that are supposed to prevent conflicts of interest, corruption, etc., are basically just a puppet show, as the government agencies that are supposed to BE watchdogs over the industry are staffed by members of the industry.

I used to assume that the doctors who devoted their lives to their field knew what was best for me and my children, by reason of their education and experience. MY experience has taught me that, in the case of far too many doctors, their pharma-directed education combined with the pharma-funded insurance industry left them unable to see past their prescription pads.